The Rapture (Return of Christ) & Doomsday Predicted

[mat]

If there was such thing as evolution all rags would be extinct.

 

[ElanJo]

Did you get chance to watch this Phil? I should be able to fill in any gaps where the video isn't clear.

Just watched the video, superb presentation, glad I watched it with the speakers on because the soundtrack especially was brilliant! It's a decent explanation of one possibility, but I don't think it explains what happened, but not how it happened. For example, how did the trilobyte change into the fish. If it happened over billions of years, where are all the inbetween bits? In the section about the fish growing legs, what advantage did the fish get (assuming natural selection) by having stumpy legs, surely that would slow it down in the water making it more easy to catch? Again, if it happened over billions of years, there must have been more than one to develop this mutation at the same time and to meet another one that was also developing the same mutation at the same time in order for them to reproduce and the mutation to continue. During this time, they had to find other animals with similar mutations, whilst avoiding being eaten etc...

It just seems that it's highly unlikely, the only argument being that given enough time anything is possible, but I just don't buy it, like I said earlier it seems to me that it requires at least as much faith as a belief in a deity. Apologies if I've missed anything.

I do have some more questions though...

I get what you're saying about the missing link, but I still don't think it covers it. If the start was a series of cells, at some point they had to turn into something, if everything on earth started out the same, and now we have millions of different creatures at some point one creature must have changed into another creature.

If this took billions of years, why can't we see anything that is halfway between one thing and another. If it happened spontaneously, why does it not still happen now?

Regarding the age of the earth, can you explain what the current thinking is, and how the age of the earth is determined? Is it through the different strata of the earth, carbon dating, red shift etc? because it seems to me they are all based on assumptions which may or may not be true... strata may not always form at the same rate etc, carbon dating assumes the thing was entirely carbon at the beginning, red shift requires the big bang or a single starting point for everything.

What's your opinion on the fish fossils on mountain tops I mentioned earlier?

What's your opinion on why humans are considerably more developed/intelligent than every other creature on earth?

You mentioned that there is the idea of an intelligent designer in current scientific thinking, can you go into that in a bit more detail?

Isn't it the case that things tend to degrade in quality rather than increase? mutations in people very rarely improve them for example, houses left alone crumble and fall (poor example I know but I've had a long day :-)) so how is this considered in evolution (not so much natural selection), similarly animals (lions for example) that are deformed are generally left by the herd to fight for themselves and therefore have virtually 0 chance of survival in the world.

How much of this is proven in labs and on what scale? Obviously, no one was around billions of years ago so how can we be certain of these things?

Whats your opinion on why? Like the video said at the end?
Sorry for all the questions, but thinking about this all weekend :-)

1. It doesn't explain how it happened because it's an overview and general history of the universe.

2. Fish didn't evolve out of trilobites

3. Fish that grew stumps/legs did so in shallow waters. Eventually amphibians evolved out of them.

4.

here must have been more than one to develop this mutation at the same time and to meet another one that was also developing the same mutation at the same time in order for them to reproduce and the mutation to continue. During this time, they had to find other animals with similar mutations, whilst avoiding being eaten etc...

False. Evolution occurs within populations. The mutation enters the genetics of the population and eventually becomes numerous to a point that either a new species diverges out of the original or the original species dies out leaving only the those with the mutation.

5.

It just seems that it's highly unlikely

That's because you've misunderstood evolution. Your version of evolution is, I agree, very unlikely.

6.

I get what you're saying about the missing link, but I still don't think it covers it. If the start was a series of cells, at some point they had to turn into something, if everything on earth started out the same, and now we have millions of different creatures at some point one creature must have changed into another creature
If this took billions of years, why can't we see anything that is halfway between one thing and another. If it happened spontaneously, why does it not still happen now?

It's a gradual incremental process and yes we do see creatures that are "half evolved" from what we see today. The fossil record is full of them. As for it not happening now, that's doubly false. For one, again, it is a slow gradual process, and secondly we have numerous recent examples of species that have evolved/speciated in the past century or so.

7.

What's your opinion on the fish fossils on mountain tops I mentioned earlier?

What's your opinion? Have you bothered at all to look into it? have you completely dismissed tectonics?
If you look at the history of the earth, finding fossils on mountain sides is nothing out of the ordinary. Mountains that we see today weren't always mountains. Deserts that we see today weren't always deserts. Forests that we see today weren't always forests, and so on...
Your opinion is that it was caused by Noah's flood, right? If there was a global flood we would not find fossils laid out as we do. They'd all be mixed up in the strata. We'd have humans above and below dinosaurs, large mammals below amphibians etc. etc. etc. Instead we find the fossils laid out exactly as we would expect if evolution were true - as it is.

8.

Isn't it the case that things tend to degrade in quality rather than increase?

In a closed system, yes. Our environment isn't a closed system. We have a star that keeps energy flowing. The 2nd law of thermodynamics won't help you debunk evolution. Whoever told you about it, or whichever site you got it off, lied to you.

9.

mutations in people very rarely improve them for example

What? like the mutation to be immune from HIV?
Yes, mutations can be harmful, but when it comes to evolution they are completely irrelevant. Harmful mutations don't really get passed on too often because a harmful mutation makes it harder for the individual animal to survive long enough to mate and thus the mutation is unlikely to be passed on to future generations. Nature (natural selection) acts as a siv when it comes to mutations. Of course, today, where we take care of those unfortunate enough to be born with defects etc., natural selection doesn't have as much impact on humans.




I'd advice you to spend some time understanding the basics of evolution. You clearly don't understand it and, well, it's fascinating.

 

[Damocles]

2. Fish didn't evolve out of trilobites

Now that you said that, it just hit me. What were those hard shelled things called that diverged into both arthropods and soft framed fish? They were just after the jawless fish and I seem to have confused them with trilobites.

I've edited some of the post to Phil.

Nice post by the way. You have a posting style on these types of subjects which is sometimes refreshing and sometimes annoying; a kind of "cut the bullshit" approach that gets to the heart of the matter. You'd never make a politician :-)

 

[jamiegrimble]

Getting back on topic. There appears to be a quite a few new denominations seizing on the Book of Daniel and his vision. (which scholars have been aware of from day one) and his prophetic interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, and coming up with an inaccurate calculation, the religious world titles Daniels book as. ‘The key to Bible prophecy’. Apparently Daniel foresaw all the great Kingdoms that were to rule the earth before they actually did in Symbolic metaphor.. Even Secular intellectuals have difficulty doubting what he foresaw in mainly beastly symbols. The clues are all there. Numbers/Maths are given, it is possible to work out a date for the end time via the dream, however this information needs accurate understanding from the right source to interpret.Daniel,chapter 2 and 7 allow the reader a view.

 

[ElanJo]

2. Fish didn't evolve out of trilobites

Now that you said that, it just hit me. What were those hard shelled things called that diverged into both arthropods and soft framed fish? They were just after the jawless fish and I seem to have confused them with trilobites.

I've edited some of the post to Phil.

Nice post by the way. You have a posting style on these types of subjects which is sometimes refreshing and sometimes annoying; a kind of "cut the bullshit" approach that gets to the heart of the matter. You'd never make a politician :-)

It's been a while since I watched or read anything about the Cambrian (and the periods close to it) but I am pretty sure that the predator of the early (jawless) fish evolved from the trilobite family. I think I remember that fish evolved out of eel-like creatures. Tho, with that said, some of them were armoured so perhaps you were right. How fish gave rise to amphibians is pretty well documented but how fish fist came about is less so.

I was really only exposed to fish evolution by way of Whale evolution (a slight obsession of mine) so I wouldn't take my word for it, even tho that is the pretty strong impression I have currently.

Yea, I'd be a crap politician - it's lucky then that I'm a voluntaryist!

 

[Maintainin]

of course there is the nice little cop out of nobody knows apart from the deity itself. so you can keep the promise of the rapture going.
one question? is the date known and not telling or are we at the making ones mind up time?

Maybe...

According to the bible, no one except the father knows but it does say certain things have to happen first (everyone in the whole word has to hear about Jesus and be given opportunity to be forgiven), and there will be signs that it's going to happen soon (wars all over the place amongst other things)

...And the bezan shall be huge and black, and the eyes thereof red with the blood of living creatures, and the whore of Babylon shall ride forth on a three-headed serpent, and throughout the lands, there'll be a great rubbing of parts. Yeeah...

...For the demon shall bear a nine-bladed sword. Nine-bladed! Not two or five or seven, but nine, which he will wield on all wretched sinners, sinners just like you, sir, there, and the horns shall be on the head, with which he will...

...Obadiah, his servants. There shall, in that time, be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things wi-- with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment.

At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock. Yea, it is written in the book of Cyril that, in that time, shall the third one...

Yea, verily, at that time, it is written in the book of Obadiah. A man shall strike his donkey and his nephew's donkey and anyone...

...in the vicinity...

...of his nephew or the donkey<br /><br />-- Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:48 am --<br /><br />

What a mint sounding word rapture is...............

So when's Brian coming back?

Ahem.

Ohhh!
Who are you?

We are three wise men.

What?!

We are three wise men.

Well, what are you doing creeping around a cow shed at two o'clock in the morning?

That doesn't sound very wise to me.

We are astrologers We have come from the East

Is this some kind of joke?

We wish to praise the infant We must pay homage to him

Homage?
You're all drunk. It's disgusting. Out! The lot, out!
Bursting in here with tales about oriental fortune tellers.
Come on. Out!

No, no. We must see him.

Go and praise someone else's brat! Go on!

We were led by a star.

Or led by a bottle, more like. Go on. Out!

well, we must see him. We have brought presents.
Gold. Frankincense. Myrrh.

Well, why didn't you say? He's over there. Sorry the place is a bit of a mess. Well, what is myrrh, anyway?

It is a valuable balm.

A balm?
What are you giving him a balm for?
It might bite him.

What?

That's a dangerous animal. Quick! Throw it in the trough.

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is. It's great, big mmm...

No, no, no. It is an ointment.

Aww, there is an animal called a balm,... or did I dream it?
So, you're astrologers, are you?
Well, what is he then?
What star sign is he?

Uh, Capricorn.

Uhh, Capricorn, eh?
What are they like?

Ooh, but... he is the son of God, our Messiah.
King of the Jews.

And that's Capricorn, is it?

Uh, no, no, no. That's just him.

Ohh, I was going to say, 'Otherwise, there'd be a lot of them.'

By what name are you calling him?

Uh, 'Brian'.

We worship you, O Brian, who are Lord over us all. Praise unto you, Brian, and to the Lord, our Father. Amen.

Do you do a lot of this then?

What?

This praising.

No, no. No, no.

Er, well, um, if you're dropping by again, do pop in Heh.
And thanks a lot for the gold and frankincense, er, but don't worry too much about the myrrh next time.
All right? Heh. Thank you! Good-bye!

Well, weren't they nice? Hmm. Out of their bloody minds, but still.




Brian. The babe they called 'Brian', He grew,... grew, grew, and grew-- Grew up to be-- grew up to be A boy called 'Brian'-- A boy called 'Brian'.

He had arms... and legs... and hands... and feet, This boy... whose name was 'Brian', And he grew,... grew, grew, and grew-- Grew up to be-- Yes, he grew up to be A teenager called 'Brian'-- A teenager called 'Brian',

And his face became spotty. Yes, his face became spotty, And his voice dropped down low And things started to grow On young Brian and show He was certainly no-- No girl named 'Brian', Not a girl named 'Brian'. And he started to shave And have one off the wrist And want to see girls And go out and get pissed,

A man called 'Brian'-- This man called 'Brian'-- The man they called 'Brian'-- This man called 'Brian'!

 

[lloydie]

You mentioned that there is the idea of an intelligent designer in current scientific thinking, can you go into that in a bit more detail?

I mentioned that it is possible that if the multiverse theory is proven to be correct (and it looks promising). This would mean that every possible event (from the collision of two atoms, to worlds blowing up) will happen in some Universe somewhere, therefore it would be logical to assume that some Universe must have a creator. Unfortunately, this also means that some Universe must be completely filled by Ewoks. It's just a logical consequence of the theory rather than any particular evidence.
.

I've asked this of you previously but you seemed to have missed it, have you got a source for this as I fail to see why it must follow logically?

 

[Damocles]

I've asked this of you previously but you seemed to have missed it, have you got a source for this as I fail to see why it must follow logically?

As I mentioned, the source is just logic based upon the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. This was put forward by Everett, you can read his paper here.

If every possible event occurs, a creator must exist in some realm. Every Boolean condition is met.

 

[lloydie]

I've asked this of you previously but you seemed to have missed it, have you got a source for this as I fail to see why it must follow logically?

As I mentioned, the source is just logic based upon the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. This was put forward by Everett, you can read his paper here.

If every possible event occurs, a creator must exist in some realm. Every Boolean condition is met.

Strange that Everett was a convinced atheist.

We still don't have a creator for the membranes though, as the same problem applies as the 'thing'.

I can only assume that your definition of a creator doesn't encompass omnipresence or that the creator created everything. Not being expert on Boolean logic you may be right, nor can I follow yours tbh, but I suspect from the tone of your post that that wasn't the point.

 

[Damocles]

As I mentioned, the source is just logic based upon the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. This was put forward by Everett, you can read his paper here.

If every possible event occurs, a creator must exist in some realm. Every Boolean condition is met.

Strange that Everett was a convinced atheist.

We still don't have a creator for the membranes though, as the same problem applies as the 'thing'.

I can only assume that your definition of a creator doesn't encompass omnipresence or that the creator created everything. Not being expert on Boolean logic you may be right, nor can I follow yours tbh, but I suspect from the tone of your post that that wasn't the point.

Everett's views on religion have no bearing on this discussion.

No, I didn't mean a creator in the terms of a religious deity or omnipotent figure, just an entity that creates a Universe. Hell, if MWI is correct, we're all Gods in the notion that we all create Universes with every decision.